Wednesday, 9 May 2018

Husain
Haqqani, Pakistan's former ambassador to the US, is a fierce critic of his
country's military establishment. In a DW interview, Haqqani calls for a
"reimagining" of Pakistan's Islamic state ideology.

Husain Haqqani: The idea of my latest book was born in a
conversation many years ago, when Salman Rushdie [novelist] said, "If
nations are imagined communities, Pakistan is poorly imagined." There were
some valid criticisms about how Pakistan was created in a hurry. The generation
before us had to suddenly stop being Indian and start being Pakistani; they
needed an ideology. I am a Pakistani by birth, so I don't need it.

In my book, I thought how I could contribute to the
process of reimagining Pakistan. The good thing about imagination is that what
is poorly imagined can be reimagined. That is why I wrote this book.

70 years of ideological orientation cannot be reversed
overnight. Any attempt to phase out the invoking of religion as ideology would
have to be gradual. Pakistan's civilian and military leaders would have to work
together to ensure over time that Pakistanis realize the pitfalls of their
contrived national narrative. The first step in that direction would be to
trigger a debate over alternative paths for the country, something that
has almost been shut down since former military dictator General Zia-ul-Haq's
era.

There are those who would argue that the state ideology
has helped Pakistan survive against the threat of disintegration, especially
after the loss of Bangladesh. But that suggests that Pakistan, as a nation and
as a state, cannot sustain itself except through ideological rhetoric, which,
in turn, must be sustained through issues that mean little for most people in
the 21st century. If that is the case, Pakistan has no choice but to stay mired
in conceptual argumentation as Islamization has proved to be a recipe for
unceasing internal conflict.

The alternative is for Pakistan to evolve as a functional,
territorial nation state and a working federation of its various component
ethnicities and nationalities. For that to happen, its leaders must take a stand
against the unidimensional preoccupation with ideology.

It seems that many Pakistanis are challenging
the state ideology these days. A number of mass movements have taken on the
country's powerful military, which many analysts say is the custodian of
Pakistan's Islamic ideology. Should the military establishment be worried about
these developments?

The Pakistani military has always feared ethno-linguistic
identities and believed they would result in a break up of Pakistan. Any
demands for more autonomy or creation of states based on ethnic or linguistic
bases are perceived as anti-national and other countries (especially India and
Afghanistan) are accused of helping these demands. The separation of Pakistan's
eastern wing in 1971 only reinforced these fears.

Pakistan's ideological national identity has always been
seen as the glue that will tie disparate ethnicities together and will over
time reduce the ethnic-linguistic bonds. The truth is justice, fair
treatment and a genuine federalism is the real way to keep Pakistan
together and to make it stronger.

At independence, the Pakistani state feared Pashtun
irredentist demands. This led to the policy of encouraging Islamization in the
northwestern regions of the country as a counter to nationalist Pashtun
sentiments. The Pakistani "deep state" is unable to view any peaceful
movement as genuine because this runs counter to their narrative about
Pakistan. Just as the Baluch uprising is treated as anti-national so is the
Pashtun awakening seen as against Pakistani interests. But the Pashtun Tahafuz
Movement is a genuine popular movement seeking human rights and protection of
the Pashtun peoples' lives and dignity. There is no evidence that the thousands
of young people joining it are foreign supported or externally inspired.

Nawaz Sharif's ouster only reinforces what can best be
described as Pakistan's viceregal tradition. Elected politicians are subject to
the whims and "superior judgment" of appointed generals, judges, and
civil servants, just as they were during the British colonial era. One need not
be convinced of Sharif's innocence to note that in the last 70 years, all
elected Pakistani prime ministers have either been assassinated, dismissed or
forced to resign by heads of state with military backing, or deposed in coups
d'état. Sharif was himself a protégé of the military establishment once but now
that he challenges them, he is being targeted through courts that once gave him
carte blanche.

The Trump administration has taken a tough
stance against Pakistan in relation to Islamabad's alleged support to
Islamists. What should Pakistan do to allay US concerns?

The Trump administration's policies reflect the deep
mistrust that has characterized the US-Pakistan relationship. At the heart of
that dysfunction is the divergence of core interests in South Asia. Even at the
height of the alliance, the United States never shared Pakistan's views about
its co-leadership in the region and its envisioning of India as a major threat
to its neighbors.

The Americans doled out military assistance and economic
support in return for favors such as intelligence bases against the Soviet
Union and China during the 1950s and 60s as well as for using Pakistan as the
staging ground for jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan during the 1980s.

Pakistan, on the other hand, single-mindedly defined its
national interest in terms of rivalry with India. The Soviet withdrawal from
Afghanistan was not the end of jihad for Pakistan but the beginning of an
opportunity to expand jihad to Kashmir and even India. Turning Afghanistan into
a satellite with the help of obscurantist proxies like the Taliban and the
Haqqani Network became an obsession for the all-powerful Pakistani military and
intelligence services. Even blowback in the form of extremist attacks inside
Pakistan did not alter that calculus.

The US understood that Pakistan was not on board with its
vision for Afghanistan as well as the entire region. But there were NATO
transshipments and intelligence sharing to consider. Presidents George W. Bush and
Barack Obama also hoped that incentives, and occasional threats, would
eventually lead Pakistan to change its strategic calculus. For that reason they
put up with a situation in which American troops died in Afghanistan at the
hands of fighters who received assistance and protection across the border, in
the territory of an ostensible ally who received economic and military
assistance from the US.

Meanwhile, Pakistan's military believed that the policies
it was pursuing are in the country's "national interest" as the
generals define it. They would not change their definition of national interest
until the cost of pursuing it became higher than what they are willing to bear.

American and Pakistani interests can converge only when
one of the two countries changes its definition of its interests in
Afghanistan, in relation to terrorism, and about China's primacy in the
Indo-Pacific region.

Husain Haqqani is a leading South Asia expert
and former ambassador of Pakistan to the United States. He is currently a
Senior Fellow and Director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson
Institute in Washington, DC.

About Me

Dr Shabir Choudhry has done extensive research on the issue of Kashmir and Indo Pakistan relations. He passed BA Honours in Politics and History, and Mphil in International Relations (title of the thesis, ‘Kashmir and Partition of India’); and title of his PhD thesis is ‘Kashmir- An issue of a nation not a dispute of a land’.

Apart from this Dr Shabir Choudhry passed Post Graduates Certificates in Education, and NVQ Assessor’s qualifications; and taught English in London.

Political Achievements

Founder member of JKLF (Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front established in 1977) and got elected as a Press Secretary in 1984.

Became its Secretary General in 1985, and resigned from this post in 1996.

Got elected President of JKLF and Europe in May 1999, and decided not to contest in elections of July 2001.

Said good - bye to the JKLF as it is in many groups and is largely seen as advancing a Pakistani agenda on Kashmir dispute, and set up a new party Kashmir National Party in May 2008.

.

At present, he is:

·Spokesman Kashmir National Party and Director Diplomatic Committee;

·Spokesman for International KashmirAlliance;

·Founder member and Director Institute of Kashmir Affairs;

Previously

·A founder Member and Trustee/ Director of London based registered charity, Kashmir Foundation International and resigned from this position in August 2001.

·Regularly take part in the Sessions of the UN Human Rights (Commission) now Council in Geneva; and address various conferences and seminars to oppose violence and highlight the Kashmir cause.

·Participated in a Round Table Conference on Kashmir, organised by Socialist Group of European Parliament in Brussels in 1993.

·Addressed as a Chief Guest in a seminar on issue of Mangla Dam during the UN Sub Commission’s proceedings in August 2003.

·Addressed as a key - note speaker in a seminar on the issue of Gilgit and Baltistan, organised by Association of British Kashmiris.

·Addressed as a keynote speaker on human rights conference in Paris in 1991.

·Addressed at CambridgeUniversity as a Chief Guest in a conference on Kashmir in 1990.

·Addressed as a keynote speaker at New Delhi conference on Kashmir, which was part of Track Two diplomacy in November 2000.

·In September 2008, addressed a Conference arranged by Interfaith International in Geneva, topic of which was:“Kashmir Issue, Terrorism and Human Rights”.

·Addressed as a speaker in a NGO Conference on Self - Determination in Geneva in August 2000.

·Addressed as a keynote speaker in a fringe meeting of Liberal Democrats at their Annual Conference in Brighton in 1995.

·Participated in World Human Rights Conference in Vienna in 1993.

·Before President Clinton's visit to India and Pakistan in 2000, lead a JKLF delegation to the State Department to discuss Kashmir dispute and situation in South Asia.

·Also had two rounds of meetings with senior State Department officials before President Musharraf’s meeting to Washington in June 2003.

·Apart from that had meetings with senior officials including Ministers of different countries, and also held many meetings with the State Department and Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials on number of occasions.

·Played important role in advancing a Kashmiri perspective on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir; and also helped Baroness Emma Nicholson with her report ‘Kashmir: present situation and future prospects’, which was adopted by the European Parliament in May 2007.

·Won first prize in an essay competition in Urdu in 1976. It was organised by High Commission of Pakistan in London, and title of the essay was 'Qaaid-e- Azam's role in Islamic History'.

·Apart from that have addressed conferences in Brussels, Geneva, Toronto, Islamabad, Delhi, and

Publications

·Got first Urdu novel ‘Fareena’ published at the age of eighteen.

·Second Urdu novel ‘Bay-Khataa’ which was about the problems of Asian youths living in UK published in 1983.

·Third Urdu book ‘Pakistan and Kashmiri struggle for independence’ published in 1990.

·Fourth Urdu book is also on Kashmiri struggle, 'Is an independent Kashmir a conspiracy?'

·Apart from that has twenty books and booklets published in English on various aspects of the Kashmiri struggle.

·Recent publications are: Kashmir dispute as I see it

·Different perspective on Kashmir

·JKLF visit to Pakistan Administered Kashmir

·Kashmir Needs Change of Heart

·If not self - determination then what?

·Emma Nicholson report- who has won?

·Struggle for independence, Jihad or proxy war (Introduction by Baroness Emma Nicholson)

·

Future publications

Following books were completed some time ago and shall be published in near future:

In Search of Freedom - My visit to Srinagar and Islamabad

Kashmir and Partition of India

A brief background

Dr Shabir Choudhry was born in a small village called Nakker Shimali (near Panjeri) in District Bhimber, Azad Kashmir. He went to UK in 1966, and like other people from the region, holds a dual nationality. He left secondary school in 1970 with no qualifications and began his life as a textile worker.

In 1975 he started part time studies and passed Matriculation from Government High School Panjeri, passed ‘O’ and ‘A’ levels from UK, and resumed full time degree course in 1981, and passed BA (Hons) in Politics and History in 1984.

He continued full time and part time jobs until he got his Mphil. He passed his PGCE (Post Graduates Certificate in Education) in 1990, and then started full time job as a Lecturer. Due to health problems he resigned from teaching in 1999. At present he is self - employed, provides private tuition, translation and interpretation and consultancy.

Through out his adult life he has actively worked for the cause of Kashmir, and even during long illness he effectively carried out his responsibilities as a leader of the JKLF, a ‘prolific writer’ and consistent campaigner of Rights Movement and peace in Jammu and Kashmir and South Asia.